Journal of Research in Ecology
Journal of Research in Ecology
ISSN No: Print: 2319 –1546; Online: 2319– 1554
An International Scientific Research Journal
Original Research
Influence of sowing time and plant population on seed cotton yield Authors: Hafiz Ghanzafar Abbas1, Hasee-ur-Rehman2, Arif Malik3, Said Salman4 Qurban Ali3 and Abid Mahmood1
ABSTRACT: The present study was conducted to evaluate yield performance of cotton under various plant spacing by keeping normal to maximum plant population under four sowing dates. FH-NOOR cotton variety was sown in triplicate split-plot design having a net plot size measuring 5.45×3.78m, while keeping sowing dates as main-plot and plant populations as sub-plots. The results indicated that there was a significance difference among sowing dates, plant spacing and interaction between sowing dates Institution: and spacing for round all studied traits of cotton. It was found that the higher 1. Cotton Research Station performance of cotton genotype was recorded for 24 inch plant spacing and six inch Faisalabad, Ayub plant spacing for most of the studied traits under early and late sowing dates as Agricultural Research compared with intermediate sowing dates. The highest plant population was recorded Institute, Faisalabad, under six inch plant spacing and second date of sowing. The good fibre quality was Pakistan. found under 18 to 24 inch plant spacing under intermediate sowing dates. It was 2. Department of Agronomy, concluded from our study that the sowing date and plant spacing affects cotton yield Bahauddin Zakariya and quality of fibre, so there is a need to grow cotton plants under optimum University, Multan. agronomic practices. 3. Institute of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, Keywords: Gossypium hirsutum, Seed cotton, Sowing times, Plant population, Fibre University of Lahore, strength. Lahore, Pakistan. 4. Department of Plant Breeding & Genetics, Ghazi University, Dera Ghazi Khan, Pakistan. Corresponding author: Qurban Ali Email ID:
Article Citation: Hafiz Ghanzafar Abbas, Hasee-ur-Rehman, Arif Malik, Qurban Ali and Abid Mahmood Influence of sowing time and plant population on seed cotton yield Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691-1702 Dates: Received: 21 April 2018 Accepted: 13 May 2018 Published: 06 June 2018 Web Address: http://ecologyresearch.info/ documents/EC0553.pdf Journal of Research in Ecology An International Scientific Research Journal
This article is governed by the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0), which gives permission for unrestricted use, non-commercial, distribution and reproduction in all medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
1691-1702| JRE | 2018 | Vol 6 | No 1
www.ecologyresearch.info
Abbas et al., 2018 enough to support germination requirement. Cotton is
INTRODUCTION Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) is known as the
very responsive to environment because it is a perennial
world’s best trading crop because it plays a significant
crop which is sown annually (Shakeel et al., 2009).
role in uplifting country`s economy. More than fifty
Early plant sowing can cause poor germination and get
countries of the world are growing cotton in tropical
attacked by insect and pests which results in reduced
areas. In Pakistan, cotton gained importance due to its
growth, reduced flowers, less boll formation and ulti-
contribution with 1.5% in Gross Domestic Product
mately distinct loss in yield. Early sown cotton has more
(GDP) and 7.1% in agriculture (Anonymous, 2016).
vegetative growth than yield (Iqbal et al., 2012a). It also
th
rd
Pakistan is known to be the 4 producer and 3 con-
reaches to early reproductive plant growth during hot
sumer of cotton in the world. In Pakistan, Punjab and
months of the year causes serious yield loss (Rahman et
Sindh contribute 80% and 20% production of cotton
al., 2007).
respectively (Anonymous, 2016). Cotton is a cash crop
Late sowing have more negative effects on plant
which provides fibre, oil, fuel wood and contributes a
like burning of seedlings due to hot weather (heat
major part in the income of farmers of Pakistan. Cotton
stress), stunted growth which results in poor vegetation,
textile sectors play an important role in the national eco-
reduction in sympodial branches, reduced flowering and
nomic stream and proved to reduce poverty (Cororaton
hence reduction in bolls per plant ultimately. Plant
and Orden, 2008). Textile industry depends upon raw
won’t get enough time to complete its phases and will
material provided by local grown cotton, about 63%
try to complete with rapid speed and shorten its growth
need for edible oil in Pakistan is met by its seed (Iqbal
and reproductive stages. Late sowing also causes flow-
et al., 2012a). Cotton is also used in pharmaceutical
ering and maturity in cold season which harms the yield
products like tarpaulin, cordage and belting.
(Elayan et al., 2015). Karavina et al. (2012) stated that
Demand depends upon quality. Quality product
sowing time severely affects the management of insect/
can support textile industry and can be exported to other
pest. Interaction of cultivar with sowing time is an im-
countries which results increase in income, reduces pov-
portant strategy to determine yield and quality in a spe-
erty and support the nation’s economy. Condition of
cific environment (Campbell and Jones, 2005). Yield
yield can get poor due to many biotic and abiotic factors
potential and fibre quality of cotton genotypes can be
such as weed infestation, insect pest, sowing too early
evaluated through sowing under different dates. Selec-
or too late, improper use of genotypes according to the
tion of genotype and proper sowing time increase vege-
existing environment (Arshad et al., 2007; Abbas et al.,
tative growth, buds, nodes, flowers, bolls per plant and
2016ab; Zia-ul-Hassan et al., 2014). Cotton yield reduc-
ultimately these factors will increase yield to a great
tion in Pakistan is due to many problems like improper
extent and quality of product like fibre, oil etc. (Abbas
nutrition, attack of insect and pests, reduced plant popu-
et al., 2015; Deho et al., 2012).
lation, irrigation, poor germination but two agronomic
Plant population severely affects the yield. Opti-
practices cause major reduction if not managed proper-
mum population of plants not only provide better yield
ly, sowing time and plant population. Sowing time is the
but it also save inputs (Nadeem et al., 2010). Plant pop-
most important factor of yield reduction because if crop
ulation also affects the quantity and quality of fibre
is not sown on proper time, it will not get suitable envi-
(Wrather et al., 2008). Bednarz et al. (2006) reported
ronment. Cotton seed needs warm soil condition and
about the problems like boll rot, increase plant height
sowing should be started as the temperature is warm
and delay maturity, fruit shedding and flower shedding
1692
Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702
0.7612
6.021
1.0072 1.2343
29.843 3211
2.8732
39216
0.00141ns 0.20456* 0.06308* 0.06412* 0.00150 0.04206ns 2.03006* 2.54183* 2.80217* 0.02918
0.0652 2.3412 0.0545
1.127 114.371 4.431
1.0208ns 41.8611* 2.3611* 2.4352* 0.5097
1.637E+07ns 6.077E+07* 3.440E+09* 9.804E+07* 2.758E+07
the importance of relation between sowing time with suitable plant population, present study was planned to attain following objectives: To determine the optimum sowing time for a specific cultivar.
To explore the potential yield of cultivar by sowing them at different densities.
1104.77ns 1529.81* 787.14* 209.60ns 169.50 0.00180ns 0.82602* 0.33065* 0.24124* 0.00061
impact on quality (Siebert et al., 2006). Keeping in view
CLCV %
Plant population/ha
of plant population can provide maximum bolls per plant which results better lint production as well as great
Plant height (cm) Boll weight (g)
caused by extra dense population. Proper management
To investigate the impact of sowing date and plant density on seed cotton yield.
MATERIALS AND METHODS The present study was conducted to evaluate yield performance of cotton under various plant spacing by keeping normal to maximum plant population under
0.9756 0.0082
37.412 1.571
Experimental details The experiment replicated thrice and was laid out according to split-plot design having a net plot size measuring 5.45×3.78m. The sowing dates were random-
0.8652
22.571
ized as main-plots and plant populations as sub-plots. FH-NOOR was used as an experimental material. Crop husbandry
1.0965
Slight irrigation was applied to create favoura82.811
28.77ns 1072.13* 322.91* 93.11* 31.59 0.896ns 135.333* 7.222* 2.778* 4.407 0.14583ns 5.07639* 9.29861* 0.42824* 0.72361
0.20828ns 2.55419* 2.13332* 0.26208ns 0.15946
Sympodial branches 1st Boll opening
Monopodial branches
Number of bolls
four sowing dates.
ble condition for seedbed preparation. At field capacity, field was cultivated with tractor mounted cultivator
Error
Grand 29.871 48.769 mean Standard 0.2352 1.2056 error *=significant (P 0.05); ns=non-significant
0.0625ns 23.2500* 1.4722ns 2.5648* 0.9292 0.14583ns 2.05556* 0.38889ns 0.66667* 0.70139 2 3 3 9 3 0 Replication Days Spacing D×S
df
Days taken to 1st bud
Days taken to 1st flower
along with planking. FH-NOOR was sown on four dif-
Source
Table 1. ANOVA Table for plant population and cotton planting date and their effects on cotton seed yield and fibre quality
Seed cotton yield (kg)/ha 691217ns 9402426* 3164103* 322616* 173978
Fibre length (cm)
Fibre fineness
Abbas et al., 2018
Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702
ferent
dates (15-April, 1-May, 15-May and 1-June)
with different spacing (24, 18, 12 and 6 inches). The crop was sown on beds with hand chopa by using 20kg/ ha fuzzy seed. Slight irrigation was applied in order to have successful germination. The crop was fertilized at 150-100-50 kg NPK/ha. All other agronomic and entomological practices were kept uniform and normal. The yield data recorded was analysed by using analysis of
1693
Abbas et al., 2018 Table 2. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (days taken for 1 st bud) Days of sowing D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean
S. No 1 2 3 4 5
S1 29.667abc 29.667abc 30.000abc 31.000a 30.083A
S2 30.000abc 29.667abc 30.000abc 29.667abc 29.833A
Plant spacing S3 29.667abc 29.333bc 29.667abc 30.000abc 29.667A
S4 29.333bc 28.667c 30.667ab 30.333ab 29.750A
Mean 29.667AB 29.333B 30.083A 30.250A
Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%. S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016; D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016
Significantly a maximum of 50.00 (1st flower)
variance technique (Steel, 1997).
data was recorded when sowing date and plant spacing was used as 01-June at 12 and 6 inch both. Significantly
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The results presented in Table 1 show the signif-
a less data of 44.66 (1st flower) was recorded which was
icant effect of sowing date on 1st bud emergence. Inter-
statistically in par with 46.00 when sowing date and
action of sowing date with plant spacing had significant-
plant spacing were used as 15-April at 6 inch and 15-
st
ly promoted 1 bud emergence of cotton. The signifist
April at 18 inch respectively. Early sown cultivar with
cant effects of sowing date on formation of 1 flower of
proper spacing promote early bud formation which ulti-
cotton were recorded while plant spacing had no signifi-
mately produce early flowering and hence initiates early
st
cant effect on 1 flower formation. Interaction of sow-
boll formation and opening thus can prevent 25% shed-
ing date and plant spacing significantly affected the
ding (Table 3). These conclusions are similar to the
st
formation of 1 flower of cotton. It was found from the
findings of Farrukh et al. (2009), Deho et al. (2012),
results that maximum 31.00 days were taken to 1st bud
Khan et al. (2015) and Ullah et al. (2012).
under sowing date and plant spacing of 01-June at 24
The Table 4 presented data about 1st boll open-
inch. Significantly least value was recorded as 28.66th
ing of cotton. Date of sowing had significant effect on
sowing date (1 May) and plant spacing (6 inch) were
1st boll opening. Significantly maximum value 83.25
used. Plant spacing had no significant effect on 1 st bud
was recorded when sowing date was 01-May. Signifi-
emergence (Table 2). As early sown varieties affect
cantly least value 81.83 was recorded by using sowing
sympodial branches it ultimately affects early emer-
date as 01-June which was statistically in par with 82.41
st
gence of 1 bud which was also confirmed by the find-
at 15-May. Plant spacing also significantly affects the
ings of Farrukh et al. (2009) and Deho et al. (2012).
1st boll opening. Significantly maximum value was at-
Table 3. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (1st flower) S. No 1 2 3 4 5
Days of sowing D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean
S1 48.333bcd 48.667abc 48.000cd 49.333abc 48.583A
S2 46.000ef 48.667abc 48.333bcd 49.667ab 48.167A
Plant spacing S3 S4 47.000de 44.667f 50.000a 48.667abc cd 48.000 48.667abc 50.000a 50.000a A 48.750 48.000A
Mean 46.500C 49.000AB 48.250B 49.750A
Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%. S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016; D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016
1694
Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702
Abbas et al., 2018 Table 4. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (1st boll opening) S. No 1 2 3 4 5
Days of sowing D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean
S1 82.333bcde 84.000a 82.000cdef 81.667defg 82.500A
S2 82.333bcde 83.333abc 83.000abcd 82.333bcde 82.750A
Plant spacing S3 82.667abcde 83.667ab 83.333abc 82.667abcde 83.083A
S4 80.333g 82.000cdef 81.333efg 80.667fg 81.083B
Mean 81.917B 83.250A 82.417B 81.833B
Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%. S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016; D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016
tained as 83.08 which were statistically in par with
significant effect on sympodial branches of cotton, even
82.50 when spacing was used as 12 and 24 inch respec-
when we use plant spacing as a sole factor, it had no
tively. The least significant results were recorded as
significant response as well. These results are confirmed
81.08 when 6 inch spacing was used. Interaction of
by the findings of the following researchers. Elongated
sowing date and plant spacing had no significant effect
plant height allows more sympodial branches to grow as
st
on 1 boll opening of cotton. Plant spacing and sowing st
compared to short statured plants, when subjected to
date trigger 1 boll opening which may be due to early
early sowing condition. Khan et al. (2015) reported that
sown the variety reached to its physiological maturity
sympodial branches are boll bearing branches, so more
early by getting more suitable temperature, environment
the sympodial branches there will be more bolls per
and optimum plant to plant space which supports the
plant which contributes in yield enhancement. This phe-
plant to express its growth without any disturbance as
nomena is applicable for same cultivars. Sympodial
compared to the late and narrow sown varieties. These
branches and boll bearing also depends upon genetic
results are similar with the findings of Iqbal et al.
makeup which is different in different cultivars and time
(2012b) and Deho et al. (2012).
of sowing and have no impact (Deho et al., 2012;
The results from Table 5 show about the signifi-
Batool et al., 2010).
cant effect of sowing date on sympodial branches of
Results from table 6 show that date of sowing
cotton. Significantly a maximum data of 23.50
had significant effect on monopodial branches. Signifi-
(sympodial branches) was recorded when date of sow-
cantly maximum value was achieved as 1.62 when crop
ing was used as 15-April. Least significant value was
was sown at 15-April which was statistically at par with
recorded as 15.50 while using sowing date as 01-June.
1.31 where sowing date was 01-May. Significantly least
Interaction of sowing date and plant spacing had no
value of monopodial was achieved at 0.69 which was
Table 5. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (sympodial branches) S. No
Days of sowing
1 2 3 4 5
D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean
S1 23.000abc 20.000bcde 18.333def 15.667fg 19.250A
S2 24.333a 19.667cde 18.333def 14.000g 19.083A
Plant spacing S3 23.333ab 22.667abc 20.333bcde 15.333fg 20.417A
S4 23.333ab 21.667abcd 20.333bcde 17.000efg 20.583A
Mean 23.500A 21.000B 19.333B 15.500C
Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%. S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016; D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016
Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702
1695
Abbas et al., 2018 Table 6. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (Monopodial branches) S. No
Days of sowing
1 2 3 4 5
D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean
S1 1.7733abc 1.1600cde 0.3300fg 1.2200bcde 1.1208B
S2 1.8633ab 1.9967a 1.4400abcd 0.8833def 1.5458A
Plant spacing S3 1.7733abc 1.4433abcd 0.6633efg 0.7733ef 1.1633B
S4 1.1067de 0.6633efg 0.3300fg 0.0000g 0.5250C
Mean 1.6292A 1.3158A 0.6908B 0.7192B
Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%. S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016; D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016.
statistically in par with 0.71 when date of sowing was
ing and sowing date had significantly affected the num-
used as 15-May and 01-June respectively. Data in given
ber of bolls per plant. Significantly a maximum value of
table also showed significant results of plant spacing on
58.66 was recorded when sowing date and plant spacing
monopodial branches. Significantly a maximum value
was used as 15-April at 24 inch. Whereas least signifi-
1.54 was achieved at 18 inch spacing, while least signif-
cant value was recorded as 17.33 where 01-June at 6
icant value was achieved as 0.52 at 6 inch plant spacing.
inch sowing date and plant spacing were used. Out of
Interaction of sowing date and plant spacing had no
the many factors it might be one of them that bolls per
significant effect on the monopodial branches. Monopo-
plant increases as an increase in the sympodial branch-
dial branches are greatly affected by the sowing time
es. Khalid et al. (2016) reported that there is an increase
because early sown varieties are subjected to that tem-
in 25% bolls per plant in early sown cotton cultivars and
perature and solar duration that physiologically affected
have less boll shedding per plant which ultimately sup-
the monopodial branches in a positive manner. On the
ported yield enhancement. Ali et al. (2009) reported that
other hand, plant spacing allowed plant to grow its can-
due to moderate temperature of environment for early
opy according to its potential due to this, plant can pro-
sown variety; photosynthates were translocated easily
mote its monopodial branches. These results are in line
which fulfilled plant nutrient needs that support more
with the findings of Ullah et al. (2012).
number of bolls. These results are also confirmed by the
The results provided in Table 7 show that number of bolls were significantly enhanced by the effect of sowing date and plant spacing. Interaction of plant spac-
findings of Ullah et al. (2012), Hakoomat et al. (2011), Iqbal et al. (2012b) and Deho et al. (2012). The data provided in Table 8 show the signifi-
Table 7. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (number of bolls) S. No 1
Days of sowing D1
S1 58.667a
S2 42.000b
2 3 4 5
D2 D3 D4 Mean
33.000bcde 24.333efg 27.667ef 35.917A
38.667bcd 27.000ef 25.333efg 33.250A
Plant spacing S3 S4 bc 39.667 32.000cde 38.000bcd 29.333de 18.667fg 31.417A
26.667efg 19.333fg 17.333g 23.833B
Mean 43.083A 34.083B 25.000C 22.250C
Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%. S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016 D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016
1696
Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702
Abbas et al., 2018 Table 8. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (boll weight (g)) S. No 1 2 3 4 5
Days of sowing D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean
S1
Plant spacing S3
S2 k
3.9567 4.1333i 5.0060a 4.3340g 4.3575D
h
f
4.2200 4.6700ef 4.7333d 4.3470g 4.4926C
4.6300 4.7000de 4.7967c 4.0167j 4.5358B
S4
Mean a
5.0290 4.8067c 4.9367b 4.2563h 4.7572A
4.4589C 4.5775B 4.8682A 4.2385D
Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%. S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016 D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016
cant effect on boll weight of cotton when different sow-
May. Significantly less plant height 99.42cm was rec-
ing dates and plant spacing were used. The interaction
orded at 01-June which was statistically in par with 15-
of sowing date and plant spacing had a huge positive
May where 109.0cm height of plant was obtained. Data
effect on boll weight of cotton. Significantly maximum
presented in above given table showed that plant popu-
boll weight was obtained 5.02 in 15-April at 6 inch sow-
lation had significant effect on the plant height of cot-
ing date and plant spacing was used which were statisti-
ton. Significantly maximum plant height 123.83cm was
cally at par with 5.00 when sowing date and plant spac-
recorded when plant population was 87120 plant/ha and
ing was used as 15-May at 24 inch. Significant boll
it was statistically in par with 113.67cm plant height
weight (3.95g) was obtained when sowing date and
where plant population (43560 plant/ha) was recorded.
plant spacing were used as 15-April at 24 inch. Due to
Significantly less plant height (93.33cm) was recorded
moderate temperature of the environment for early sown
which had 29040 plant/ha and was statistically in par
variety, photosynthates were translocated easily which
with 21780 plants/ha which had plant height (97.33cm).
fulfilled plant nutrient needs due to which accumulation
Interaction of sowing date on different plant spacing had
in boll is enough to support better lint production. These
no significant effect on the plant height. The plant
results were also conformed by the findings of Ali et al.
height depends upon the genetics of cultivar (Batool et
(2009), Deho et al. (2012) and Hakoomat et al. (2011).
al., 2010). Height of plant mainly depends upon existing
The data presented in Table 9 show that the time
environmental conditions. Early sown varieties have
of sowing had significant effect on the plant height of
more plant height as compared to the late sown because
cotton. Significantly maximum 126.08 cm plant height
early varieties have more duration of growth than late
was recorded in 15-April and it was statistically in par
ones. The above given results were confirmed by the
with the plant height 116.33cm at the sowing date 01-
findings of Hakoomat et al. (2011), Ullah et al. (2011),
Table 9. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (plant height (cm)) S. No 1 2 3 4 5
Days of sowing D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean
S1 113.0bcde 113.67bcde 99.67def 97.33def 105.92B
S2 124.33abc 109.67bcdef 103.0cddef 93.33ef 107.58B
Plant spacing S3 S4 123.67abc 143.33a 116.67bcd 125.33ab abc 124.00 109.33bcdef f 89.67 117.33bcd AB 113.50 123.83A
Mean 126.08A 116.33AB 109.0BC 99.42C
Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%. S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016 D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016.
Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702
1697
Abbas et al., 2018 Table 10. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (CLCV%)
1 2 3
Days of sowing D1 D2 D3
S1 0.0000d 0.0000d 0.3333d
S2 0.0000d 0.0000d 0.6667cd
Plant spacing S3 S4 0.0000d 0.0000d 0.0000d 0.0000d d 0.0000 O.3333d
4 5
D4 Mean
1.6667c 0.5000B
3.6667b 1.0833AB
4.0000b 1.0000AB
S. No
6.0000a 1.5833A
Mean 0.0000B 0.0000B 0.3333B 3.8333A
Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%. S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016 D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016
Iqbal et al. (2012a) and Deho et al. (2012).
findings of Muddassir et al. (2016).
The results presented in Table 10 show that
The results from Table 11 show that date of
sowing date and plant spacing had significant results on
sowing had no effect on plant population while plant
eradication of Cotton Leaf Curl Virus (CLCV) of cot-
spacing significantly affect the population of cotton
ton. Interaction of different sowing dates with various
plants. Interaction of plant spacing with different sow-
plant spacing successfully eradicates CLCV. Signifi-
ing dates had significantly provided better plant popula-
cantly maximum CLCV was recorded as 6.00 when
tion. Significantly maximum plant population was
sowing date and plant spacing were as 01-June and 6
achieved as 70180 when sowing date and plant spacing
inch. Significantly least CLCV was detected as 0.00
were 15-April and 6 inch. Least significant density was
which was statistically on par with 0.66 when sowing
achieved as 17747 which were statistically in par with
date and plant spacing were 15-April and 24 inch; 15-
26055 when sowing date and plant spacing were 15-
May and 18 inch respectively. It is in the genetics of the
April and 24 inch; 01-June and 18 inch respectively.
plant to protect itself from virus and other diseases
Plant spacing is crucial to get proper plant population.
(Batool et al., 2010). Early sown varieties have mini-
More or less than a optimum limit, it causes reduction in
mum virus infestation that might be due to available
yield, quality and quantity (Hakoomat et al., 2011).
temperature and other environmental conditions as com-
Proper plant population can save input cost and help
pared with late sown varieties because early sown varie-
plant to perform better in the existing environment as it
ties are subjected to that temperature in which virus is
gets better light, water and air. These findings were sup-
inactive and plants get enough time to get mature and
ported by the work of Siebert et al. (2006), Elayan et al.
protect themselves. These results are confirmed by the
(2015), Karavina et al. (2012) and Nadeem et al.
Table 11. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (plant population/ha) S. No 1 2 3 4 5
Days of sowing D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean
S1 17747g 20973fg 17747g 20973fg 19360D
S2 26620f 27911ef 29040ef 26055fg 27407C
Plant spacing S3 35493de 41947cd 39527cd 37913cd 38720B
S4 70180a 60177b 45173c 58080b 58403A
Mean 37510A 37752A 32872B 35755AB
Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%. S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016 D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016
1698
Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702
Abbas et al., 2018 Table 12. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (seed cotton yield (kg/ha)) Days of Plant spacing S. No sowing S1 S2 S3 S4 Mean 1
D1
3359.3cd
3603.3bc
4190.0ab
4745.0a
3974.4A
2 3 4 5
D2 D3 D4 Mean
3064.7cde 2379.0ef 1742.0fg 2636.2C
3581.3bc 3234.3cd 1621.0g 3010.0B
3718.7bc 3468.3c 1952.0fg 3332.3B
4758.7a 3121.3cd 2766.7de 3847.9A
3780.8A 3050.7B 2020.4C
Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%. S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016; D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016
Table 13. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (fibre length (mm)) S. No 1 2 3 4 5
Days of sowing D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean
S1 28.443fg 28.220g 29.933b 29.810b 29.102B
S2 28.790de 29.953b 30.697a 30.567a 30.002A
Plant spacing S3 29.303c 30.537a 27.767h 28.550ef 29.039B
S4 28.277fg 29.287c 30.007b 28.867d 29.109B
Mean 28.703C 29.499AB 29.601A 29.448B
Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%. S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016; D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016
(2010).
2636.2kg/ha where plant spacing was used as 24 inch. The results provided in Table 12 showed that
Interaction of sowing date and plant spacing had no
date of sowing had significant effect on cotton seed
significant effect on cotton seed yield. Cotton seed yield
yield. Significantly maximum cotton seed yield was
might be affected the by time of sowing as well as pop-
recorded as 3974.4kg/ha which was statistically on par
ulation. If a crop is sown on proper time it will get suita-
with 3780.8kg/ha where sowing date were 15-April and
ble environment which trigger photosynthetic activity in
01-May respectively. Significantly less cotton seed
plant that supports more food production which ulti-
yield was recorded as 2020.4kg/ha where crop was
mately help the plant to express its potential. On the
sown at 01-June. Plant spacing also significantly in-
other hand plant population is directly proportional to
creased seed cotton yield, maximum value was obtained
yield, because more the plants there will be more
as 3847.9kg/ha where plant spacing was used as 6 inch.
branches, leaves, bolls which produce lint and seed. So
Significantly least cotton seed yield was recorded as
proper time and population not only increase the cotton
Table 14. Comparison of treatment means for plant population and the effect of cotton planting dates on seed cotton yield and fibre quality (fibre fineness (µg/inch)) S. No 1 2 3 4 5
Days of sowing D1 D2 D3 D4 Mean
S1 6.0833c 6.4100a 5.8600ef 5.8667e 6.0550a
S2 5.8300efg 6.1733b 5.9567d 5.8000fg 5.9400b
Plant spacing S3 5.8333ef 6.0500c 5.9567d 5.7667g 5.9017c
S4 5.8333ef 6.0600c 6.0433c 6.1800b 6.0292a
Mean 5.8950c 6.1733a 5.9542b 5.9033c
Means sharing the different letters are significantly different from each other’s at 0.05%. S1=24 inch plant spacing; S2= 18 inch plant spacing; S3= 12 inch plant spacing; S4=6 inch plant spacing; D1=15-04-2016; D2=01-05-2016; D3=15-05-2016; D4=01-06-2016
Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702
1699
Abbas et al., 2018 seed yield but also provide better quality products. The-
(2011).
se findings are supported by the work of Ullah et al. (2011), Hakoomat et al. (2011) and Nadeem et al.
CONCLUSION
(2010).
Our study concluded that the sowing date and The results from Table 13 showed that date of
plant spacing affects cotton yield and quality of fibre, so
sowing and different plant spacing had significant effect
there is a need to grow cotton plants under optimum
on the fibre length of cotton. According to the given
agronomic practices.
data, the interaction of maximum fibre length 30.69, 30.56 and 30.53 were recorded at 15-May and 18 inch;
REFERENCES
01-June and 18 inch; 01-May and 12 inch date of sow-
Abbas HG, Mahmood A and Ali Q. 2015. Genetic
ing and plant spacing respectively. Significantly less
variability and correlation analysis for various yield
fibre length 28.22 was recorded at 01-May and 24 inch
traits of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Journal of
which was statistically on par with 28.44 where 15-
Agricultural Research, 53(4):481-91.
April and 24 inch date of sowing and plant spacing were used. Fibre length was affected due to physiological changes imposed by the environment. When suitable temperature and space were given to the plant, photo-
Abbas HG, Mahmood A and Ali Q. 2016a. Zero tillage: a potential technology to improve cotton yield. Genetika, 48(2): 761-776.
synthetic assimilation provide optimum energy to fulfil
Abbas GH, Shahid MR, Mahmood A and Ali Q.
all the needs which results better fibre length (Ullah
2016b. Characterization of plant spacing best fit for
et al., 2011). These results are confirmed by the findings
economic yield, fiber quality, whitefly and CLCuV dis-
of Deho et al. (2012) and Wrather et al. (2008).
ease management on upland cotton. Nature and Science,
The results presented in Table 14 showed that different sowing dates and plant population significantly effect fibre fineness of cotton. According to the provided data it is concluded that interaction of sowing dates and plant population had significant effect on fibre fineness. Significantly maximum fibre fineness 6.41 data
14(5):12-16. Arshad M, Wajid A, Maqsood M, Hussain K, Aslam M and Ibrahim M. 2007. Response of growth, yield and quality of different cotton cultivars to sowing dates. Pakistan Journal Agricultural Science, 44(2): 208-212.
was recorded at 01-April and 24 inch sowing date and
Ali H, Afzal MN and Muhammad D. 2009. Effect of
plant spacing. Significantly less fibre fineness was rec-
sowing dates and plant spacing on growth and dry mat-
orded as 5.76 which was statistically on par with 5.80
ter partitioning in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.).
when sowing date and plant spacing were 01-June and
Pakistan Journal Botany, 41(5): 2145-2155.
12 inch; 01-June and 18 inch respectively. Though there are many requirements but when a crop is sown on the proper time and place then it performs well in many aspects and demand of energy is fulfilled when required
Anonymous. 2016. Economic survey of Pakistan. Ministry of food, Agriculture and Livestock, Government of Pakistan, Finance Division. Islambad. 19-40p.
agronomic practices were uniform. It supports ideal
Batool S, Khan NU, Makhdoom K, Bibi Z, Hassan
growth which results better quality and quantity of the
G,
fibre. These results are conformed by the findings of
Raziuddin and Khan IA. 2010. Heritability and genet-
Siebert et al. (2006), Deho et al. (2012) and Ullah et al.,
ic potential of upland cotton genotypes for morpho-
1700
Marwat
KB,
Farhatullah
F,
Mohammad,
Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702
Abbas et al., 2018 yield traits. Pakistan Journal Botany, 42(2): 1057-1064 Bednarz GW, Nichols RL and Brown SM. 2006. Plant density modification of cotton within boll yield components. Crop science, 46: 2076-2080.
genotype × environment interactions for yield and fiber cotton
performance
trials.
environment of Punjab. Pakistan Journal Agricultural Science, 64(1): 59-63. Iqbal M, Saghir A, Wajad N, Taj M, Bismillah MK,
Campbell BT and Jones MA. 2005. Assessment of quality in
nitrogen rates and sowing dates under diverse agro-
Euphytica,
144(1-2): 69-78. Cororaton CB and Orden D. 2008. Pakistan's cotton and textile economy: Intersectoral linkages and effects on rural and urban poverty, Research reports 158, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington, D.C. 107 p. Deho ZA, Laghari S, Abro S, Khanzada SD and Fakhuruddin. 2012. Effect of sowing dates and picking intervals at boll opening percent, yield and fibre quality of cotton cultivars. Science Technology Development, 31(3): 288-293. Elayan ED, Sohair Abdalla AMA, Abdel-Gawad Nadia SD and Wageda AEF. 2015. Effect of delaying planting date on yield, fiber and yarn quality properties in some cultivars and promising crosses of Egyptian cotton. American-Eurasian Journal Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, 15(5): 754-763. Farrukh MS, Shakeel AA, Amir Sl, Shraf MY and Khan HZ. 2009. Effect of row spacing and earliness and yield in cotton. Pakistan Journal Botany, 41(5): 2179-2188 Hakoomat A, Naveed MA, Faiz A, Shakeel A, Maqbool A and Raheel A. 2011. Effect of sowing date, plant spacing and nitrogen application on growth and productivity on cotton crop. International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 2(9): 1-6.
Mubshar H, Abid M, Tauseef M, Asifa H and Karim A. 2012b. High plant density by narrow plant spacing ensures cotton productivity in elite cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) genotypes under severe Cotton Leaf Curl Virus
(CLCV)
infestations.
African
Journal
of
Biotechnology, 11(12): 2869-2878. Karavina C, Mandumbu R, Parwada C and Mungunyana T. 2012. Variety and planting date effects on the incidence of the relationship between fiber initiation and lint percentage in cotton. Pakistan Journal Botany, 46(6): 2227-2238. Khalid U, Ayatullah Naimatullah K and Sohrab K. 2016. Genotype-by-sowing date interaction effects on cotton yield and quality in irrigated condition of Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal Botany, 48(5): 1933-1944. Khan Uz, Khan Z, Shoaib Ur, Rehman SU, Abid MA, Malik W, Hanif CM, Bilal M, Qanmber G, Latif A, Ashraf J and Farhan U. 2015. Exploitation of germplasm for plant yield improvement in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L). Journal of Green Physiology Genetics and Genomics, 1(1): 1-10. Nadeem MA, Ali A, Tahir M, Naeem M, Chadhar AR and Ahmad S. 2010. Effects of nitrogen level and plant spacing on growth and yield of cotton. Pakistan Journal of Life Social Sciences, 8(2): 121-124. Muddassir M, Jalip MW, Noor MA, Zia MA, Aldosri FO, Zuhaibe AH, Fiaz S, Mubushar M and Zafar MM. 2016. Farmers’ perception of factors hampering maize yield in rain-fed region of Pind Dadan
Iqbal J, Wajid SA, Ahmad A and Arshad M. 2012a.
Khan, Pakistan. Journal of Agricultural Extension, 20
Comparative studies on seed cotton yield in relation to
(2): 1-5.
Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702
1701
Abbas et al., 2018 Rahman HR, SA Malik, M Saleem and Hussain F. 2007. Evaluation of seed physical traits in relation to heat tolerance in upland cotton. Pakistan Journal Botany, 39(2): 475-483. Shakeel A, Hakoomat A, Naveed A and Dilbaugh M. 2009. Effect of cultivars and sowing dates on yield and quality of Gossypium hirsutum L. crop. Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment, 7(3 and 4): 244-247. Siebert JD, Steward AM and Leonard BR. 2006. Comparative growth and yield of cotton planted at various densities and configurations. Agronomy Journal, 98 (3): 562-568. Steel RGD. 1997. Principles and procedures of statistics: a biometrical approach. McGraw-Hill, New York New York, USA. 400-428 p. Ullah H, Inayat UA, Mansoor M, Ejaz AK, M Anwar K. 2011. Effect of sowing time and plant spacing on fibre quality and seed cotton yield. Sarhad Journal Agriculture. 27(3): 411-413. Ullah K, Fateh CO, Shamasuddin T, QammarUddin C and Mohammad MK. 2012. Response of sowing time to various cotton genotypes. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 28(3): 279-385. Wrather JA, Phipps BJ, Stevens WE, Phillips AS and Vories ED. 2008. Cotton planting date and plant population effects on yield and fibre quality in the Mis-
Submit your articles online at ecologyresearch.info
sissippi Delta. Journal of Cotton Science, 12: 1-7
Advantages
Zia-ul-Hassan KA, Kubar I, Rajpar AN, Shah SD, Tunio J, Shah A and Maitlo AA. 2014. Evaluating potassiumuse-efficiency of five cotton genotypes of Pakistan. Pakistan Journal Botany, 46(4): 1237-1242.
Easy online submission Complete Peer review Affordable Charges Quick processing Extensive indexing You retain your copyright
submit@ecologyresearch.info www.ecologyresearch.info/Submit.php.
1702
Journal of Research in Ecology (2018) 6(1): 1691–1702